Automotive News, Media & Press - E-Dragsters Challenging Gas-Powered Cars and Motorcycles for Records

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,291546,00.html

I'd quote the whole article, but it's too long...


Interesting read, though.

Well, it's really just a matter of time and battery technology advacement.

For anyone who is involved with Radio Control hobbies it's pretty obvious how much electrics have changed in the last 5 years.

For the most part, the lithium powered brushless motor RCs outperform their nitro/gas competition. Especially in pure power/top speed displays.

I have been driving hybrids with Toyota Proving Grounds lately and I am actually impressed with electric motors. What has 4 cylinders and 295 ft/lbs of torque? A Prius.

What has 4 cylinders and 295 ft/lbs of torque? A Prius.

The 06 Evo 2.0 litre has 289lbft without any batteries or ridiculous electric motors (redundant, fuel powered devices are engines lol).

Electrics are lame. I don't like the sound of a 4-banger, no matter how much power it makes, but I-6s can be mean, and V8s, 10s, and 12s are things of beauty.

Doesn't matter what you run them on - gasoline, ethanol, diesel, hydrogen, anything, as long as you burn it! :devil:

Gotta hear that exhaust growl or scream, gotta feel the engine straining on the mounts as it presses you in the seat, rearing and snorting as it jumps ahead, devouring the pavement.

No, priuses and all hybrids and electrics are for smug hippies who don't account for cost of ownership (post warranty), cost of disposal, and for pure electrics, where the power actually comes from. They are NOT for people who actually LIKE cars (you have to keep buying new ones to stay in the warranty period, they are appliances for A to B'ers).

Also, don't forget that the prius has something else besides 4 cylinders and 295lbft - 4 doors, horrible performance, and hideous styling, along with a female shunning effect. lol

I agree, the Prius is not a Ferrari by any means. The Prius is low end of the market for hybrid. Lets try a Lexus 460 Hybrid, hmmm 0-60 around 5 on electric.

Impressive? Sure. Enough to take away the NHRA Pro Stock bike record? Not by a long shot. It may only be 2.4 seconds away, but they'll need to TRIPLE that motors output to challenge that record.

I agree, the Prius is not a Ferrari by any means. The Prius is low end of the market for hybrid. Lets try a Lexus 460 Hybrid, hmmm 0-60 around 5 on electric.

A lexus is just an overpriced toyota. And isn't the 460 an SUV? (or am I thinking of something else?)

Think of a 427 Cobra. What comes to mind? Performance, looks, power, and the *noise*. It's an integral part. As is the feel that goes along with it.

An electric could go a thousand miles on a charge, hit 250mph, and reach 60 in 3 seconds and I wouldn't care, it's still a battery powered POS.

And in a more practical sense, there is still the issue of batter manufacture, battery disposal, how to clean up accidents, where the power comes from to charge them, and the cost of maintenance and repairs.

As Jeremy Clarkson would say, electrics and hybrids are silly things.

A good euro diesel car will get far better mpg than a prius, btw. And as Gale Banks is proving, diesel is the way of the future for road going performance (he's working on lightweight diesel blocks, and spinning them much faster - there's no octane limit with diesel).

Impressive? Sure. Enough to take away the NHRA Pro Stock bike record? Not by a long shot. It may only be 2.4 seconds away, but they'll need to TRIPLE that motors output to challenge that record.


Do you think that is a 350hp continous motor? No.

He is feeding it more than continous rating already. What is to stop him from feeding it more? A good low resistance power source and overheating.

You could put 1500 hp on a 500hp continous electric motor provided the run time is "short" and you have proper cooling. Do you have the power source for it?

There are electric motors on the market right now that you can shoot well over 500hp to for good periods of time. Surely 1500 hp for short durations. Plan to pay on the order of 2000.00 USD for one of these motors. They already have a TH400 output shaft though. :):)

Oh and add about 500 for the eletric controller.

Impressive? Sure. Enough to take away the NHRA Pro Stock bike record? Not by a long shot. It may only be 2.4 seconds away, but they'll need to TRIPLE that motors output to challenge that record.
Well, the article said he will be upgrading from 350 hp to almost 1,000 hp. That's pretty close to TRIPLE.

Well, the article said he will be upgrading from 350 hp to almost 1,000 hp. That's pretty close to TRIPLE.

I have been looking into this for a long time.

Well, it isn't a bolt in mod or I woulda done it already.

1. Cooling the motor: liquidified gasses??
2. Highcost low resistance power source: Condensers aren't there yet. They have low resistance though. Super capacitors have the farads but low voltage. Batteries can have low resistance but expensive.
3.Extreme danger to work on. Has to be at least be 440V.

Even if you assume 60% efficiency you are going to need a shitload of joules to get there. Does 13 million joules sound about right to you guys? Find me a 440V capacitor bank that has 134 farads and I will provide the motor and the car.

--edit-- Those numbers are for 130mph 3500lbs. --edit--
Copper rotor is highly preferred.

Well, they are impressive, but not going to challenge for overall top speed records. The guy in the article makes the argument that electric motors have instant torque, that combustion motors need to 'spin up' to produce. What he doesn't realize is that top fuel cars are currently limited by traction. They make sooo much damn torque at launch that they need 5 clutch packs to soften the hit or else they smoke the tires. What is currently holding back top fuel cars is traction, and the human body. If a top fuel car could launch harder, the driver's would need a g-suit to be able to handle the g-forces created.

Well, they are impressive, but not going to challenge for overall top speed records. The guy in the article makes the argument that electric motors have instant torque, that combustion motors need to 'spin up' to produce. What he doesn't realize is that top fuel cars are currently limited by traction. They make sooo much damn torque at launch that they need 5 clutch packs to soften the hit or else they smoke the tires. What is currently holding back top fuel cars is traction, and the human body. If a top fuel car could launch harder, the driver's would need a g-suit to be able to handle the g-forces created.

A G-suit (at least a pilot's G-suit, but I've not heard of any other kind), works by squeezing the legs and lower body to prevent blood from pooling in them (and thereby leaving the brain) under positive Gs (the kind that wants to compress your spine by pushing your head through your body, down into your ass). It wouldn't help for car acceleration Gs. (unless it was driving through a loop, like the old hot wheels tracks or something - but then it's positive G, just like a plane pulling a tight loop or turn.)

Well, they are impressive, but not going to challenge for overall top speed records. The guy in the article makes the argument that electric motors have instant torque, that combustion motors need to 'spin up' to produce. What he doesn't realize is that top fuel cars are currently limited by traction. They make sooo much damn torque at launch that they need 5 clutch packs to soften the hit or else they smoke the tires. What is currently holding back top fuel cars is traction, and the human body. If a top fuel car could launch harder, the driver's would need a g-suit to be able to handle the g-forces created.


That is not an arugement. It is 100% true. When the driven part of the motor is not moving and you have a huge magnetic field you have a huge amount of force available from the first mircosecond. That force is pretty much the same througout the RPM range. Even if there are tractive issues off the line you still are getting more power at a lower RPM than a combustion engine could. Name one combustion engine that gets the same power at 1RPM 100RPM or 1000RPM.


Electrons move faster than a fuel air charge can. A combustion motor can't produce maxium force at any RPM and it can't instantly respond to inputs. Electic motors are practically a flat torque curve. Electric motors also make increases and decreases in force instantly. Put in a feedback loop with excitor rings and you can make a system that puts max tractive effort on the tyres at all time. Adjusting 100 times a second if you want.

The "traction control" on combustion engines takes a horrible amount of time and people think it is useless/sucks because of the time it takes the engine to respond. Electric motors could make a system where no spinning is allowed X feet off the line and response time would be fast enough where traction control would be useful for a change. Yes, I know about tangential tyre spring/acceleration.

Another HUGE factor is that if this is set up properly it wouldn't have much to break. A motor would you might have to replace a couple times a season, a battery pack, and a rear end. Electric motors are cheap compared to race petrol engines. The clutch packs or transmission if applicable are not needed. Less weight probably makes a big difference when you are racing for .01s. or .1s.

That is not an arugement. It is 100% true. When the driven part of the motor is not moving and you have a huge magnetic field you have a huge amount of force available from the first mircosecond. That force is pretty much the same througout the RPM range. Even if there are tractive issues off the line you still are getting more power at a lower RPM than a combustion engine could. Name one combustion engine that gets the same power at 1RPM 100RPM or 1000RPM.


Electrons move faster than a fuel air charge can. A combustion motor can't produce maxium force at any RPM and it can't instantly respond to inputs. Electic motors are practically a flat torque curve. Electric motors also make increases and decreases in force instantly. Put in a feedback loop with excitor rings and you can make a system that puts max tractive effort on the tyres at all time. Adjusting 100 times a second if you want.

The "traction control" on combustion engines takes a horrible amount of time and people think it is useless/sucks because of the time it takes the engine to respond. Electric motors could make a system where no spinning is allowed X feet off the line and response time would be fast enough where traction control would be useful for a change. Yes, I know about tangential tyre spring/acceleration.

Another HUGE factor is that if this is set up properly it wouldn't have much to break. A motor would you might have to replace a couple times a season, a battery pack, and a rear end. Electric motors are cheap compared to race petrol engines. The clutch packs or transmission if applicable are not needed. Less weight probably makes a big difference when you are racing for .01s. or .1s.

You missed my point, or rather, I didn't make my point clear. The guy in the article was making the argument that electric powered vehicles will be quicker due to the instant torque. If you've seen a topfuel dragster launch, you know that they don't have an issue with torque off the line. And to clarify top fuel cars really aren't a combustion engine. The nitromethane actually explodes and doesn't burn till it reaches the atmosphere. Nitro is an explosive and not really all that good as a combustible.....it will burn, but explodes a heck of a lot better.

My point is, it takes 6000-7000 hp to accelerate a car to 330mph in a quarter mile, can they do that in an electric motor that doesn't weight 3000lbs? I use to work at Sunoco testing product on the pipeline and they had electric motors to pump the gas through 18" pipes at 1000 psi. They cranked out something like 1800hp but needed a crane to move them. Granted technology has changed, but when factoring in power vs. packaging weight, it's tough to beat harnessing the explosive power of nitro.

I saw your point. You just didn't think everything I stated was an advantage.

Electrics mean instant power managent with less weight than IC engines and a very wide operating range:

1. No clutches would be needed. Less replaceables. Less weight.
2. Tranny not needed. [n/a for top fuel] Less weight. Less cost.
3. Easy to locate entire powertrain EXTREME back of car for ever better weight distrib

I believe they could fair very well at the local dragstrips. GM's crapperbox EV1/EV2 was pretty darn fast. 184 MPH max speed with a motor designed for least power consumption; only a fraction of the power I was considering. I bet the name plate on a comparable motor was only 10HP. But, remember you can temporary overpower an eletric motor.

One thing that is changing the power of electric motors is that they are starting to use copper rotors again. This significantly improves efficiency with small added cost. Motors with AL rotors are already in the 60% efficiency range.

Another thing you are overlooking is that yes those industrial motors were that big to provide 1800 CONTINOUS HORSEPOWER. You can get 1500 HP from a motor the size of a watermelon for a short period of time. The motor won't say that on the ID plate, but you can do it. Ask any Electrical Engineer. Such is the magic of electric motors.

Your points are well taken and I'm actually impressed with electric technology and how far it's come. Talking about rc cars, 7-10 years ago, I was into it pretty bigtime with my dad. It was something that we got together on the weekends and met up with some other guys in a school parking lot and raced. Being a speed junkie, I had a 0.21 nitro car, with two speed trans and had it clocked at around 80 mph. Talk about fun. I hated electric because of the relative slow performance and how quick the batteries started to tail off.

Well it's been a four or five years now since I've been in the hobby and started to hear about the new battery technology, as well as the brushless motors. A kid down the street had a HP car that if I didn't know any better I thought was nitro. It was reaching some quick speeds and seemed to run forever. The nice thing was no 3-4 hour tear down and clean up from the fuel, and it was quiet, which is nice for being stelthy.

Again, I think battery technology is pretty slick, but tire technology has to improve for us to see any serious gains in top fuel 1/4 records.

One of my old college buds used to run one of those nitro dirt RCs. He would get really crazy with it. I regret not getting into it. :( I believe nitrometh is in the 20 dollars a gallon range though isn't it??!

http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/33853/113/

:corn:

No helmet.
Burn out in public.
Operating a motor vehicle (race bike, even) on a sidewalk. KEEP IT ON THE TRACK! Yes, I did read that the area was cleared. Still, highly unacceptable to do this in public.

Bright man. I should apply to be a government scientist. I hear they have openings...

You figure they could of set up some sort of speed/power limiter being totally electronically controlled.

That guy gives scientists a bad name.